NEIGHBOURHOOD DEPRIVATION IN A CHANGING ECONOMIC CLIMATE THE

NEIGHBOURHOOD DEPRIVATION IN A CHANGING ECONOMIC CLIMATE THE POBAL HP DEPRIVATION INDEX, 1991 2011 Trutz Haase & Jonathan Pratschke Dublin, May 2014

THE UNDERLYING DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE q Demographic Decline (predominantly rural) § population loss and the social and demographic effects of emigration (age dependency, low education of adult population) q Social Class Deprivation (applying in rural and urban areas) § social class composition, education, housing quality q Labour Market Deprivation (predominantly urban) § unemployment, lone parents, low skills base

MAPPING DEPRIVATION most disadvantaged most affluent marginally below the average disadvantaged very disadvantaged extremely disadvantaged marginally above the average affluent very affluent extremely affluent

FROM BUST TO BOOM AND BUST AGAIN

ED-LEVEL ABSOLUTE INDEX SCORES 1991

ED-LEVEL ABSOLUTE INDEX SCORES 1996

ED-LEVEL ABSOLUTE INDEX SCORES 2002

ED-LEVEL ABSOLUTE INDEX SCORES 2006

ED-LEVEL ABSOLUTE INDEX SCORES 2011

COMPARISON OF ABSOLUTE DEPRIVATION SCORES, 1991 -2011 q Affluence grew significantly throughout the country over the 15 -year period from 1991 to 2006. q Greatest change occurred between 1996 and 2002. q Affluence grew in concentric circles around the main urban centres, demarcating the exceptional expansion of the urban commuter belts. q The recession after 2006 wiped out all progress made over the preceding 15 years.

ED-LEVEL RELATIVE INDEX SCORES 1991

ED-LEVEL RELATIVE INDEX SCORES 1996

ED-LEVEL RELATIVE INDEX SCORES 2002

ED-LEVEL RELATIVE INDEX SCORES 2006

ED-LEVEL RELATIVE INDEX SCORES 2011

RELATIVE INDEX SCORES FOR SMALL AREAS (SA) 2006

RELATIVE INDEX SCORES FOR SMALL AREAS (SA) 2011

COMPARISON OF RELATIVE DEPRIVATION SCORES, 1991 -2011 q Despite the phenomenal growth and subsequent decline in Absolute Deprivation Scores, Relative Deprivation Scores have little changed between 1991 and 2011, representing random noise only. q The most disadvantaged areas in 1991 are still the most disadvantaged in 2011 and the most affluent areas in 1991 are still the most affluent in 2011. q The only exception to this general rule is Dublin Inner City, where the boom years have led to a substantial gentrification of previously disadvantaged areas.

POBAL HP DEPRIVATION INDEX 1991 – 2011

LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING 1991 – 2011 (NOT USED IN INDEX)

NEIGHBOURHOOD DEPRIVATION IN A CHANGING ECONOMIC CLIMATE q The following slides contain an analysis of key socio-economic indicators of high density social housing areas over the 20 -year period from 1991 to 2011. q Areas are defined on the basis of their share of households in Local Authority rented housing, using 3 contrasts: § Low: less than 5% in LA rented accommodation § Medium: between 5% and 50% in LA rented accommodation § High: more than 50% in LA rented accommodation

ELECTORAL DIVISIONS WITH GREATER THAN 50% LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING IN 1991 (N=43) County ED Dublin City USHERS B Dublin City NORTH DOCK C Limerick City BALLYNANTY Dublin City PRIORSWOOD C Dublin City BALLYMUN B Limerick City JOHN'S A South County Dublin TALLAGHTFETTERCAIRN Dublin City PRIORSWOOD B Dublin City USHERS C Dublin City MERCHANTS QUAY A Dublin City ROTUNDA B Dublin City USHERS E Dublin City BALLYMUN D Limerick City CUSTOM HOUSE Cork City GURRANEBRAHER C Dublin City CHERRY ORCHARD A Dublin City BALLYMUN C Dublin City MERCHANTS QUAY C Dublin City CHERRY ORCHARD C Waterford City BALLYBEG NORTH Cork City BLACKPOOL A Limerick City GALVONE B Waterford City LARCHVILLE Dublin City BALLYMUN A South County Dublin CLONDALKINCAPPAGHMORE Cork City THE GLEN A Dublin City ROYAL EXCHANGE A Dublin Fingal South County Dublin BLANCHARDSTOWNTYRRELSTOWN BLANCHARDSTOWNMULHUDDART TALLAGHTKILLINARDAN South County Dublin TALLAGHT-JOBSTOWN Dublin City ARRAN QUAY C Dublin Fingal BLANCHARDSTOWNCOOLMINE Dublin City MANSION HOUSE A Cork City MAYFIELD Cork City MAHON B Dublin City ROYAL EXCHANGE B South County Dublin CLONDALKINROWLAGH Dublin City INNS QUAY C Cork City KNOCKNAHEENY Wicklow RATHMICHAEL (BRAY) Dublin City MOUNTJOY A Dublin City ROTUNDA A

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF AREAS WITH LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH LEVELS OF LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING Population Share based on Definition as Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 47. 6 47. 9 48. 0 48. 1 . 5 Medium (5 -50%) 48. 9 48. 6 48. 4 -. 4 High (>50%) 3. 5 3. 4 -. 1 Total 100. 0 Percentage of Households in Local Authority Housing LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 1. 7 1. 8 1. 9 2. 3 2. 8 1. 1 Medium (5 -50%) 13. 9 11. 7 9. 9 10. 3 11. 0 -2. 9 High (>50%) 69. 2 53. 9 41. 2 40. 4 35. 8 -33. 5 Total 9. 8 8. 3 7. 1 7. 5 7. 9 -1. 8 * Based on the proportion of Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas in 1991

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF AREAS WITH LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH LEVELS OF LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING Age Dependency Rate (%) LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 37. 6 34. 8 32. 1 31. 5 33. 2 -4. 5 Medium (5 -50%) 38. 3 35. 3 32. 6 31. 6 33. 2 -5. 1 High (>50%) 41. 4 36. 3 30. 7 28. 0 27. 7 -13. 7 Total 38. 1 35. 1 32. 3 31. 4 33. 0 -5. 1 Percentage of Lone Parent Families with Dependent Children LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 7. 4 9. 4 10. 5 14. 5 15. 5 8. 1 Medium (5 -50%) 12. 1 15. 8 20. 2 25. 3 25. 4 13. 3 High (>50%) 30. 1 39. 6 49. 3 54. 0 50. 5 20. 4 Total 10. 7 13. 8 16. 7 21. 3 21. 6 10. 9 * Based on the proportion of Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas in 1991

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF AREAS WITH LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH LEVELS OF LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING Percentage of Adult Population with Primary Education only LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 31. 8 25. 7 19. 1 16. 1 13. 4 -18. 4 Medium (5 -50%) 40. 2 32. 4 24. 7 21. 2 18. 1 -22. 1 High (>50%) 57. 4 43. 2 30. 2 26. 9 22. 6 -34. 9 Total 36. 7 29. 5 22. 2 18. 9 16. 0 -20. 7 Percentage of Adult Population with Third Level Education LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 16. 0 23. 4 29. 7 34. 4 34. 6 18. 6 Medium (5 -50%) 10. 7 16. 7 22. 8 27. 1 27. 0 16. 3 High (>50%) 3. 8 9. 0 18. 8 22. 5 23. 1 19. 3 Total 13. 0 19. 7 26. 0 30. 5 30. 6 17. 5 * Based on the proportion of Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas in 1991

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF AREAS WITH LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH LEVELS OF LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING Percentage of Adult Population in Higher and Lower Professional Classes LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 30. 3 32. 9 37. 2 38. 7 40. 2 9. 9 Medium (5 -50%) 21. 4 23. 1 27. 4 28. 4 30. 2 8. 8 High (>50%) 7. 3 8. 9 14. 4 15. 4 17. 9 10. 6 Total 25. 2 27. 3 31. 6 32. 9 34. 6 9. 5 Percentage of Adult Population in Unskilled and Semi-skilled Professions LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 22. 0 19. 1 16. 0 14. 8 14. 2 -7. 8 Medium (5 -50%) 33. 1 28. 5 23. 7 21. 8 20. 4 -12. 7 High (>50%) 47. 8 43. 7 35. 1 31. 7 28. 2 -19. 6 Total 28. 2 24. 4 20. 2 18. 6 17. 5 -10. 6 * Based on the proportion of Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas in 1991

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF AREAS WITH LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH LEVELS OF LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING Male Unemployment Rate LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 12. 3 10. 9 6. 6 6. 2 17. 9 5. 6 Medium (5 -50%) 22. 6 20. 2 11. 5 10. 5 25. 9 3. 3 High (>50%) 48. 4 43. 9 21. 5 20. 8 34. 6 -13. 9 Total 18. 4 16. 4 9. 4 8. 8 22. 3 4. 0 Female Unemployment Rate LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 10. 1 8. 6 5. 9 6. 0 11. 9 1. 8 Medium (5 -50%) 16. 7 14. 2 9. 5 9. 6 17. 4 . 7 High (>50%) 38. 5 31. 1 16. 6 17. 2 24. 5 -14. 0 Total 14. 1 12. 0 8. 1 15. 0 . 9 * Based on the proportion of Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas in 1991

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF AREAS WITH LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH LEVELS OF LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING Absolute Pobal HP Deprivation Index LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 9. 3 12. 9 17. 0 16. 3 6. 6 -2. 7 Medium (5 -50%) -2. 6 2. 7 6. 9 6. 4 -3. 0 -. 5 High (>50%) -19. 9 -12. 4 -6. 3 -10. 0 9. 8 Total 2. 5 7. 0 11. 3 10. 7 1. 4 -1. 1 Relative Pobal HP Deprivation Index LA rented * 1991 1996 2002 2006 2011 20 Year Change Low (<5%) 9. 3 8. 7 7. 6 8. 0 -1. 3 Medium (5 -50%) -2. 6 -1. 7 -1. 5 -2. 9 -1. 6 . 9 High (>50%) -19. 9 -18. 2 -14. 9 -16. 6 -8. 6 11. 3 Total 2. 5 3. 0 2. 9 1. 7 2. 8 . 3 * Based on the proportion of Low, Medium and High Density LA Housing Areas in 1991

NEIGHBOURHOOD DEPRIVATION IN A CHANGING ECONOMIC CLIMATE q Although relative deprivation has by and large not changed over a 20 year period, the deprivation of high density social housing areas appears to have significantly improved between 1991 to 2011, at least when measured at the level of Electoral Divisions (EDs). q Half of the areas characterised as high density LA housing areas (with more than 50% LA housing at ED level in 1991) are situated in Dublin City. q Dublin Inner City was subject to significant gentrification during the boom years in terms of the development of previously vacant sites and the inmovement of significant populations of higher socio-economic background. q Analysis of Small Area data from the 2006 and 2011 Census show that the EDs of Dublin Inner City now comprise of a patchwork of highly disadvantaged and affluent neighbourhoods in close proximity, masking the continued disadvantage of social housing estates.